You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
daniell 's review for:
The Life of God in the Soul of Man
by Henry Scougal
1/5, here are my reasons:
Language
The book was written in the 1600s, in English, so archaic diction and grammar should not surprise anyone. That it's even readable to me I consider a cultural miracle in the preservation of meaning in language, but that does not mean it's enjoyable to read. Many sentences linger on into the abyss, like the title of some Jonathan Edwards treatise fed too much fertilizer. If you don't mind thinking outside of modern English then language will not be a problem for you.
Platonism
The frail professor of theology takes no pleasure in bodily existence, and this, like the old-ness of the language used, should not come as a surprise. This was written before the advent of modern medicine and life was much different than today. He died at 27 of TB, and must have seen death and glory after death much more imminently than I do. Nevertheless, this is no excuse for denying the goodness of the world as to call it refuse. Indeed, if one does not see any hope in the world I don't know how they can claim to see greater hope elsewhere. At times his language perfectly mirrors that of Plato's cave, God being The Form To Which We Ascend For Bliss.
Method(ism)
The concept of making as ascent to God via the means that we in our free will are given is a fine thing, but to treat the matter in terms of steps, execution, and inevitable result is dishonest to the complex nature of human experience. According to the accompanying history, Charles Wesley gave this to Whitefield and it was a huge inspiration to him, and it rings very true to typical Great Awakening formulations of Atmosphere unto Experience unto Salvation. Scougal does for the Christian life what The Great Awakening did for conversion in a similar, highly rational mode.
Language
The book was written in the 1600s, in English, so archaic diction and grammar should not surprise anyone. That it's even readable to me I consider a cultural miracle in the preservation of meaning in language, but that does not mean it's enjoyable to read. Many sentences linger on into the abyss, like the title of some Jonathan Edwards treatise fed too much fertilizer. If you don't mind thinking outside of modern English then language will not be a problem for you.
Platonism
The frail professor of theology takes no pleasure in bodily existence, and this, like the old-ness of the language used, should not come as a surprise. This was written before the advent of modern medicine and life was much different than today. He died at 27 of TB, and must have seen death and glory after death much more imminently than I do. Nevertheless, this is no excuse for denying the goodness of the world as to call it refuse. Indeed, if one does not see any hope in the world I don't know how they can claim to see greater hope elsewhere. At times his language perfectly mirrors that of Plato's cave, God being The Form To Which We Ascend For Bliss.
Method(ism)
The concept of making as ascent to God via the means that we in our free will are given is a fine thing, but to treat the matter in terms of steps, execution, and inevitable result is dishonest to the complex nature of human experience. According to the accompanying history, Charles Wesley gave this to Whitefield and it was a huge inspiration to him, and it rings very true to typical Great Awakening formulations of Atmosphere unto Experience unto Salvation. Scougal does for the Christian life what The Great Awakening did for conversion in a similar, highly rational mode.